Mannings mooning incident on ESPN.

#252
#252
Boca Vol said:
Did Naughright brimg any of this up? I don't think she did. It was a writer for the NY Daily News. She can't control what they type.

It's not her fault the media and morons think this is a current issue.
Click to expand...

No, a race baiter named Shaun King did.
 
#253
#253
montanatenn said:
I haven't done my due diligence in the research of the suit, but is Peytons' accuser (naughtrite or whatever her name is), one of the 6 plaintiffs in the current title IX suit?
Click to expand...

The names of the 6 "accusers" have not been made public. Just 6 "Jane Does" at this point.
 
#255
#255
Boca Vol said:
Did Naughright brimg any of this up? I don't think she did. It was a writer for the NY Daily News. She can't control what they type.

It's not her fault the media and morons think this is a current issue.
Click to expand...

It is her fault that she is a gold digger who filed a frivolous lawsuit against Donna Karan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#258
#258
Volfan76 said:
Manning’s Accuser has a Tendency for Suing Famous People – QB | Speak
Click to expand...

This all came out on Feinbaum today. Her Peyton story which she signed as true in the settlement in the 90s never mentioned any physical contact initiated by him. She pushed him away. Go in time to her lawsuit in 2003 where mysteriously the new element of Peyton making physical contact is first introduced. She was either lying in the 90s or in 2003 but lying she was. Then take up her being a serial litigant, a clearer picture begins to take shape as to who and what kind of person this woman actually is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#259
#259
vol_in_ar said:
Grizz would hit it
Click to expand...
0NZO4.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#260
#260
KBVol said:
The names of the 6 "accusers" have not been made public. Just 6 "Jane Does" at this point.
Click to expand...

If she is a plaintiff, what are the chances she got this whole ball rolling. Just speculating, given the fact that she's been called a serial litigant and has the history with Peyton.
 
#261
#261
montanatenn said:
If she is a plaintiff, what are the chances she got this whole ball rolling. Just speculating, given the fact that she's been called a serial litigant and has the history with Peyton.
Click to expand...

No she's not. It was merely included to show a pattern by the plaintiffs' attorney.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#262
#262
Remy said:
This all came out on Feinbaum today. Her Peyton story which she signed as true in the settlement in the 90s never mentioned any physical contact initiated by him. She pushed him away. Go in time to her lawsuit in 2003 where mysteriously the new element of Peyton making physical contact is first introduced. She was either lying in the 90s or in 2003 but lying she was. Then take up her being a serial litigant, a clearer picture begins to take shape as to who and what kind of person this woman actually is.
Click to expand...

Well if the tea bagging incident is true (which has not been proven either way), then the accuser did not really lie in the 90's. Because no one specifically asked her about testicular contact. And she just remained silent on the issue of any testicular contact.
 
#264
#264
RobsPics said:
Well if the tea bagging incident is true (which has not been proven either way), then the accuser did not really lie in the 90's. Because no one specifically asked her about testicular contact. And she just remained silent on the issue of any testicular contact.
Click to expand...

Did the accuser tell the truth about being physically injured at Donna Karan's while getting a massage or is that on the up and up as well? Please elaborate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#265
#265
montanatenn said:
Gotcha, just wasn't sure if her name was mentioned or just the Peyton incident. Guess I need to read it. Thanks.
Click to expand...

It's hard to figure out what's what, it's all getting lumped together and the Peyton part gets all the attention because of who he is.

Short of reading the court documents, this piece is the most balanced thing I've read as it relates to Whited/Naughright.

How Tennessee’s Sexual Harassment Allegations Caught Up With Peyton Manning 20 Years Later
 
Last edited:
#266
#266
Here is the thing. Both Manning and Naughrite are precluded from discussing the issue any further due to the confidentiality provision in their settlement agreement. So, the press will go through this gravedigging exercise for a few more days and then, when there are no additional details, this will all die for good.

UNLESS, this idiot plaintiffs attorney truly wants to make Peyton Manning one of the faces of the Defendants' case for a matter that happened 20 years ago. To me, that would be case suicide, but I've seen lawyers do dumber things. The attorney should do himself a favor and amend the complaint to remove that allegation at the first available opportunity. If he doesn't, I look for motions by Manning and possibly even Naughrite to preclude their involvement in this case on the grounds it is irrelevant to any of the plaintiffs' claims. There will be a lot of legal maneuvering on this issue. Again, I think it was borderline malpractice to include it in the first place given Manning's popularity in the State of Tennessee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#267
#267
vol66 said:
It's hard to figure out what's what, it's all getting lumped together and the Peyton part gets all the attention because of who he is.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just got to thinking that her last lawsuit money might be drying up and she saw opportunity.
 
#268
#268
Boca Vol said:
OK. So why all the hate for Naughright? People getting their undies in a was over something from 20 years ago
Click to expand...

She didn't stick to her story. Seems to have lied either the first or the second law suit.

One thing is to be collateral damaged of a irresponsible mooning, a disgusting Teabagging that's just disgusting. She alleges he reenacted the Teabagging twice to two other players just to harass her. It's all fun and games till Peyton teabags you to harass her. Now that's being a team player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#269
#269
EZE said:
Here is the thing. Both Manning and Naughrite are precluded from discussing the issue any further due to the confidentiality provision in their settlement agreement. So, the press will go through this gravedigging exercise for a few more days and then, when there are no additional details, this will all die for good.

UNLESS, this idiot plaintiffs attorney truly wants to make Peyton Manning one of the faces of the Defendants' case for a matter that happened 20 years ago. To me, that would be case suicide, but I've seen lawyers do dumber things. The attorney should do himself a favor and amend the complaint to remove that allegation at the first available opportunity. If he doesn't, I look for motions by Manning and possibly even Naughrite to preclude their involvement in this case on the grounds it is irrelevant to any of the plaintiffs' claims. There will be a lot of legal maneuvering on this issue. Again, I think it was borderline malpractice to include it in the first place given Manning's popularity in the State of Tennessee.
Click to expand...

I think you're right on the confidentiality part, though you have to ask why did Manning keep bringing it up?

Naughright's value would be in calling her to the stand and discussing that her direct supervisor had a very crude nickname for her and used it on a regular basis for years and her complaining about it didn't make it stop...among other things. Then throw Jennings, Moshak, Tim Rogers and several others in there and you can see where this is headed.
 
#270
#270
BowlBrother85 said:
Did the accuser tell the truth about being physically injured at Donna Karan's while getting a massage or is that on the up and up as well? Please elaborate.
Click to expand...

No one (outside of the parties involved) knows if the accuser literally told the truth in any of her civil cases. I never said she was telling the truth.
 
#271
#271
vol66 said:
I think you're right on the confidentiality part, though you have to ask why did Manning keep bringing it up?

Naughright's value would be in calling her to the stand and discussing that her direct supervisor had a very crude nickname for her and used it on a regular basis for years and her complaining about it didn't make it stop...among other things. Then throw Jennings, Moshak, Tim Rogers and several others in there and you can see where this is headed.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it could put all of the focus on an incident that has no ties to the plaintiffs. This doesn't help them prove their claims. It is only in there to inflame a jury into an award of higher damages. In other words, if they prove this, and nothing else, then they lose.

That is why they would have been much better off omitting it from the beginning. Too much risk versus the potential reward IMO.
 
#273
#273
RobsPics said:
Well if the tea bagging incident is true (which has not been proven either way), then the accuser did not really lie in the 90's. Because no one specifically asked her about testicular contact. And she just remained silent on the issue of any testicular contact.
Click to expand...
Not so, she was supposed to be laying all the cards on the table in her statement in the 90s it was not question and answers, it was a settlement statement. She was either lying in her signed statement in the 90s or she was lying in 2003. You for reasons of your own need it both ways, the facts however cannot support her either or story which changed over time. Travis destroyed her credibility on Feinbaum this afternoon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#274
#274
EZE said:
The problem is that it could put all of the focus on an incident that has no ties to the plaintiffs. This doesn't help them prove their claims. It is only in there to inflame a jury into an award of higher damages. In other words, if they prove this, and nothing else, then they lose.

That is why they would have been much better off omitting it from the beginning. Too much risk versus the potential reward IMO.
Click to expand...

Again, you are focusing on Manning...When your direct supervisor calls you a C*&% Bumper referring to the fact that she came from the women's department and that implies everyone on that side is a lesbian it shows a disdain for half the department and if they call all of these disgruntled people, that UT has settled with previously to the stand they might be able to prove a pattern of behavior that suggests to a jury that the culture was not positive for women...which is the point.
 
#275
#275
Remy said:
Not so, she was supposed to be laying all the cards on the table in her statement in the 90s it was not question and answers, it was a settlement statement. She was either lying in her signed statement in the 90s or she was lying in 2003. You for reasons of your own need it both ways, the facts however cannot support her either or story which changed over time. Travis destroyed her credibility on Feinbaum this afternoon.
Click to expand...

What lie did she say in her original settlement statement in the 90's?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top